Palestine Action protests

[BettyBooper]

I do realise that this is the FWR board, but there are some undercurrents of similarity, which is my interest.

Palestine Action has be proscribed as a terrorist organisation. This protest (to my understanding) was about that decision, not about the issue in Palestine itself.

I'm concerned that what was about Palestine is now in sizable number (as reported), elderly people protesting in support of a proscribed terrorist organisation.

You can protest about Palestine without supporting this organisation. So what's happening here?

I think my concern is that bad actors are using well meaning people to push an ideology. Which is the similarity with gender ideology and hence me posting here.

Again, my concern is that the protest appears to be in support of a group rather than the cause.

However if it truly was about Elbit why daub Happy Nakba Day on it?

Because Nakba Day commemorates the mass displacement of Palestinian people and the destruction of Palestine, of which the current war in Gaza is the latest and most intensely violent episode.

It is an anti-Israeli slogan, sure. But criticism of Israel is not wrongful in itself

It's one of the reasons TRAs are so livid with JKR.

She refused to be slid over.

She came out with that statement supporting transgender people's rights to live their lives in peace... but refused to be budged onto the next step of TWAW.

She put very clear markers in the ground and did not accept the attempt to elide transgender people having rights, with transgender people's rights overbearing all other rights in all situations.

It wasn't an Israeli building, it was a Jewish building. Stop excusing blatant antisemitism. You just make Pro-Palestinianism look inherently antisemitic

Also, Arabs were killing Jews in that area far before 1948. The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem was close friends with Hitler and stayed with him for an extended holiday in Berlin

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cj0yyvj7jmmo
She told the BBC: "There may be people who are objecting to proscription who don't know the full nature of this organisation, because of court restrictions on reporting while serious prosecutions are under way.
"But it's really important that no-one is in any doubt that this is not a non-violent organisation."
Cooper added there had been "clear security assessments and advice" ahead of the ban.

The government cannot just decide to designate a group as terrorists. I assume a legal bar must be met.

This is just forced teaming normal non violent people with lets be honest a anti-semitic outfit thats attacked UK military assets and actual people.

Not buying it. Fuck em.

The stated justification was the presence of a business with relations to the weapons manufacturer. I am just pursuing the point that there is a vital distinction to be made between attacking a business because it is Jewish-owned and attacking it because of its association with a weapons manufacturer facilitating the war in Gaza.

Hopefully the police will do a good job of investigating the motive for the attack, and, as I have said, any criminal damage motivated by antisemitic hate should be punished more severely under hate crime laws.

Nothing you have posted establishes that a business has been attacked because it is Jewish-owned. You have simply assumed the group's stated motivation to be false.

And, more relevantly to the thread, nothing you have posted supports the need to invoke terrorism laws rather than laws relating to criminal damage and (if the antisemitic motivations established) hate crime laws.

People who are capable of critical thinking are generally GC and pro-Israel, so there is a big crossover in support between the two camps.

I think you might be confusing anti-Zionism with antisemitism.

As @ProfoundlyPeculiarAndWeird so eloquently puts it, there is "a vital distinction to be made between attacking a business because it is Jewish-owned and attacking it because of its association with a weapons manufacturer facilitating the war in Gaza."

The current discussion on the table is government over-reach in its invocation of anti-terrorism legislation - legislation designed to proscribe groups like Al-Qaeda - against Palestine Action and the associated implication that it may have been done to try and shut down opposition to the government's stance on Israel and its continued and egregious sale of military supplies to a regime who are currently engaged in actual and real genocide.

You're the one that tried to dismiss antisemitism as just anti-Israeli sentiment, that's also a very vital distinction to make yet you failed. Instead you tried to justify the unjustifiable. PA are smashing up and vandalising Jewish owned businesses as if it's Kristallnacht and you don't seem to think it's terrorism. Nazis also made excuses for destroying Jewish businesses. PA 'alleged' the buildings housed landlords for Elbit, they've proved nothing. Would it be acceptable if I came over to yours, alleged you were a landlord for Elbit and smashed your house up?

Most relevantly I posted the definition of terrorism where PA most clearly meets the criteria

I'm afraid you are excusing modern day Nazis

Shush shush women, don't talk about anything @ThisChicPinkRaven hasn't decided we're allowed to talk about.

On FWR, of all places.

I know the difference, @ProfoundlyPeculiarAndWeird sadly not so much

PA didn't prove anything, they just targeted civilian buildings, which is part of the criteria of terrorism

You, and they, are trying to defend terrorists

It's a point of interest, but it's nothing to do with sex and gender discussions. You might as well have posted it in The Litter Tray.

No, because there is a similarity which has been pointed out several times already.

On the one hand, I have been scolded about raising that the elderly have been arrested. 'But the elderly know their own minds!', 'you're being offensive!'. But also 'PA can't be bad because the elderly are supporting them!'.

Yes, I agree about freedom of speech. But where are all these protesters when women's freedom of speech is being eroded everywhere? Why are PA flags also seen at TRA protests?

You can protest about Palestine without having anything to do with this group. Many do. So why this particular group? This isn't like the Suffragettes.

Maybe the government has overreached, but I dislike the rhetoric that this must be the case because the protesters and the cause is on 'the left'.

Free speech does not involve threats and acts of violence towards property and people. These activists have now moved on from throwing soup at works of art and gluing themselves to the road and blocking ambulances in the name of climate change, to breaking into facilities and damaging property in order to 'encourage' a boycott and alienation of Israel and its citizens.

None of this gets people on side. It is extremist, and its intention is to change government policy through intimidation and violence. I note they are mainly fielding older, retired people whose lives will not be totally destroyed through a criminal conviction.

Palestine Action met the definition of 'terrorism' with their campaign and they vowed to continue with acts of violence.

The people now supporting it know what the consequences will be. The police and the government has to act to enforce the law, otherwise the law is meaningless.

That is your interpretation of what is going on on Gaza. Terrorism is the intention to influence government policy and have it implement your preferred solution through a sustained campaign of violence and intimidation.

Which trans rights organisations have been proscribed as terrorists making showing support for them an offence under the Terrorism Act?

As others have pointed out, PA aren’t non-violent, and have in fact done some awful stuff, including additional actions that can’t be disclosed because of ongoing court cases. While it’s fair to be watchful of government over reach, it looks like they had justifiable reasons in this case.

What’s interesting as a comparison to the TRA movement is that the surface claims are very similar in proclaiming innocence (“This never happens/there’s never been any violence/if you’re a good person then you’ll support the underdog no matter what”).

Activists broadcast these claims (innocently or not), because they’re a very effective rallying cry for people who are unlikely to look deeper but have a strong empathic impulse for whichever party is cast as the “good guy” in the story.

It’s a very obvious lever activists anywhere on the political spectrum can use to rouse people’s feelings and get them on side for the cause, because many people are unable to separate the activist group from the often morally worthy cause. I imagine a full survey of the people getting arrested would reveal that most of them don’t know why PA was proscribed, and that they are supporting both Palestine and free speech by protesting.

He recanted after being given a tour of the murder camps and seeing the reality of it. He lived his life out in obscurity, in Bosnia.

🤣🤣🤣

Evidence of this?

Because whole books have been written about Nazis and the Middle East

^^

You're very, very mistaken in fact

Husseini spent most of World War II (1939–45) in Germany, where he issued broadcasts urging revolt in the Arab world and endeavored to halt Jewish emigration to Palestine from countries occupied by the Nazis. At the war’s end he fled to Egypt, where he directed an increasingly weak and fragmented Arab Higher Committee from exile.

Britannica.com

No evidence at all of your claims on Wikipedia either